Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 25, 2012 at 13:29 answer added Ronnie Brown timeline score: -4
Jun 25, 2012 at 10:00 comment added Zachi Evenor Thanks. Now that this understood, I got the rest (I recall the since the sequence is exact $g \circ f = 1$ the trivial map.
Jun 24, 2012 at 20:23 comment added Mikhail Borovoi In this book on page 52, $\beta_\sigma$ is SOME preimage of $\gamma_\sigma$. Although $\gamma$ is a cocycle, $\beta$ in general is NOT a cocycle, and this is the point! It is a cochain, whose coboundary lives in $f(A)$ (because $\gamma$ is a cocycle), which gives us a 2-cocycle in $A$. The cohomology class of this cocycle is, by definition, $\delta^1(\gamma)$.
Jun 24, 2012 at 17:15 comment added Zachi Evenor @stankewicz See my last comment, it may help.
Jun 24, 2012 at 12:05 comment added Zachi Evenor I'm not sure. He first states that $$g( \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau ) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1}) = \gamma_\sigma \sigma \cdot \gamma_\tau \gamma_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} = 1 $$ and then deduces from that, that $$ \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau ) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} = f( \alpha_{\sigma , \tau})$$ (I'm quoting: " = 1, so $\beta ... = f( \alpha_{\sigma , \tau})$ for some unique $\alpha_{\sigma , \tau} \in A$). However, what about the general case? Why it is not =1 regardless the $f,g$ homomorphisms?
Jun 24, 2012 at 11:36 history edited stankewicz
edited tags
Jun 24, 2012 at 11:36 comment added stankewicz It seems to me like he's using the fact that $g(\beta_\sigma(\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau)\beta_{\sigma\tau}^{-1}) =1$ to say that \beta_\sigma(\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau)\beta_{\sigma\tau}^{-1} is in the image of $f$, which is of course true by the assumption that we have a short exact sequence of $G$-groups.
Jun 24, 2012 at 11:27 history asked Zachi Evenor CC BY-SA 3.0